Matter is what makes the universe, but what matters? This question has long been difficult for those who think about it – especially for physicists. Reflecting recent trends in physics, my colleague Jeffrey Eisen and I have described an updated way of thinking about matter. We propose that matter is not made up of particles or waves, as was long thought, but – more fundamentally – that matter is made up of fragments of matter.
Five to one
The ancient Greeks envisioned five building blocks of vision – earth, water, air, fire and ether. Athar was the thing that filled the sky and explained the rotation of the stars, as observed from the place of the earth’s space. These were the first most basic elements from which one could build a world. Their concepts of physical elements have not changed dramatically for nearly 2,000 years.
Then, about 300 years ago, Sir Isaac Newton introduced the idea that all things exist at a point called particles. One hundred and fifty years later, James Clark Maxwell introduced the electromagnetic wave – the inherent and often invisible form of magnetism, electricity and light. Particles served as building blocks for mechanics and waves for electromagnetism – and people settled on particles and waves as two building blocks of matter. Together, particles and waves became the building blocks of all kinds of objects.
This was a huge improvement over the five elements of ancient Greek, but it was still to blame. In a popular series of experiments, known as double-slit experiments, light sometimes acts as a particle and at other times acts as a wave. And while theories and mathematics of waves and particles allow scientists to make incredibly accurate predictions about the universe, the rules break down on the largest and smallest scales.
Einstein suggested a solution in his theory of general relativity. Using the mathematical tools available to him at the time, Einstein was able to better explain certain physical phenomena and also to resolve long-standing contradictions regarding inertia and gravity. But instead of improving on particles or waves, he removed them, as he proposed a war of space and time.
Using new mathematical tools, my partner and I have demonstrated a new theory that can accurately describe creation. Instead of relying on the theory of war in space and time, we have considered that there can be a building block that is more fundamental than a particle and a wave. Scientists understand that particles and waves are antithetical to existence: a particle is a source of matter that exists at a single point, and waves exist everywhere except at the points they create. My partner and I thought it was logical that there should be an underlying connection between them.
Flows and pieces of energy
Our theory begins with a new basic idea – that energy energy always “flows” in the spheres of space and time.
Lines Think of a line that is made up of lines that fill an area of space and time, it flows in and out of the region, never begins, never ends and never crosses each other.
Working from the idea of the universe of flowing energy lines, we invented a single building block for flowing lines. If we can find and define such a thing, we hope that we can use it to make accurate predictions on the largest and smallest scales about the universe.
There were many building blocks to choose from mathematically, but we found one that had the characteristics of both a particle and a wave – it was centered like a particle but also spread over space and time like a wave. The answer was a building block that looks like a concentration of energy – like a star – has energy that is highest in the center and comes a little away from the center.
To our surprise, we found that there are only a limited number of solutions to describe the concentration of flowing energy. Of these, we found only one that works according to our mathematical definition of flow. We have named it a piece of energy. For Ephesianados of mathematics and physics, it is defined as A = -⍺ /.R Where intens intensities are and R Distance is a function.
Using a piece of energy as a building block of matter, we then constructed the necessary mathematics to solve the problems of physics. The final step was to test it.
Back to Einstein, adding ubiquity
More than 100 years ago, Einstein led two great problems in physics to validate general relativity: the ever-too-slight annual shift in Mercury’s orbit – or prognosis, and the small bend of light approaching the Sun.
These problems were at two extremes of the size spectrum. No wave or subtle principles of matter could solve them, but this happened in general relativity. The theory of general relativity precisely changes the way Mercury travels through space and time, as seen in astronomical observations, and leads to light.
If our new theory had the opportunity to replace particles and waves with possibly more basic pieces, we too would be able to solve these theories with our theory.
For the problem of Mercury’s trouble, we have modeled the Sun as a huge static part of the energy field and Mercury as a small, but still slow moving part of the planet. For the bending light f-light problem, the sun was modeled in the same way, but the photon was modeled as a small fraction of the energy radiating at the speed of light. In both problems, we calculated the entries of the rotating pieces and found the same answers as predicted by the principle of general relativity. We were amazed.
Our initial work demonstrated how the new building block is capable of modeling the body from the smallest to the largest. Where particles and waves break down, the piece of energy building block was strong. The piece could be a potential universal building block from which to mathematically model reality – and update people’s thinking about the building blocks of the universe.
Lry ri m. Silverberg, Professor of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, North Carolina State University
This article is republished from the talk under the Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
